Text 3194, 232 rader
Skriven 2006-11-19 19:21:04 av MATT CLARK (1:123/140)
Ärende: NORTH AMERICAN UNION TAKEOVER
=====================================
>
>
>
Don't let George Bush, Robert Pastor and the other new world order elites
get away with it!!!!!

There has been no congressional oversight on the formation of this union!!

The top dogs in the both the Republican and Democrat parties are in on 
this, along with some top dogs in the military, just to make sure they 
have them in their pocket!!


This article is a must read for anyone who values their country's 
severing!!!


Also, check out the address at the bottom of this article!!!


***************************************************************************



    North American Union - A Top Goal of Secretary of Commerce


By: Jerome Corsi, Ph.D. on Sep 06, 2006

Is SPP an Executive Branch Coup d'Etat?   [www.spp.gov]

Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez has declared advancing the
Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America to one of his
top goals, writing in a letter archived on the Department of
Commerce website that "I have made the SPP one of my top priorities
and will utilize the talents and expertise of the people across the
Department of Commerce to ensure the SPP is a success."

Secretary Gutierrez began his letter with obvious enthusiasm:

    I would like to bring your attention to an exciting new
initiative that is a high priority for President Bush, me, and the
entire Bush Administration: the Security and Prosperity Partnership
of North America (SPP). This initiative was announced on March 23,
2005, by President Bush, President Fox of Mexico, and Canadian
Prime Minister Paul Martin. It establishes the framework under
which the three countries will seek to create a safer and more
prosperous North America over the coming years.

Secretary Gutierrez next laid out an explanation of how "security"
and "prosperity" fit together, using language that carefully
replaced reference to the United States of America to language
embracing the concept of "North America" as an economic and
political reality.

First, Secretary Gutierrez addressed "security."

    The SPP is built around the two, complementary objectives of
greater security and prosperity. In the security sphere, we will
aim toward a common security strategy focusing on:

        * Securing North America from external threats;
        * Preventing and responding to threats within North
America; and
        * Streamlining the secure and efficient movement of
legitimate and low-risk traffic across our shared borders. 

    Then, Secretary Gutierrez logically moved to "prosperity."

    In the prosperity sphere, the countries will focus on:
Improving productivity;

        *
          Reducing the costs of trade; and
        *
          Enhancing the joint stewardship of our environment,
facilitating agricultural trade while creating a safer and more
reliable food supply, and protecting our people from disease.

This tautological language was designed to present objectives that
looked obviously reasonable and important, almost Orwellian in
their crafting. It takes attention to detail to note that the
security and prosperity definitions virtually demand our borders
with Mexico and Canada be erased, all in the interest of
"streamlining," "shared borders," and "reducing the costs of
trade," all the while protecting our environment, our food, and our
health.

The critical part of Secretary Gutierrez's letter came next,
however, when the Secretary of Commerce explained how tri-lateral
cabinet-level working groups would be created in the three
governments with a mission to rewrite a broad array of
administrative laws all to be accomplished strictly within the
executive branches of Mexico, Canada, and the United States.

Secretary Gutierrez enters the discussion by bragging about the
importance of the role he is assigned to play:

    Organizationally, I am jointly responsible for the economic,
or prosperity, component of the SPP, with my Canadian counterpart,
Minister of Industry David Emerson, and my Mexican counterpart,
Secretary of Economy Fernando Canales. Secretary of Homeland
Security Michael Chertoff, jointly with his Canadian and Mexican
counterparts, is responsible for the security component. Secretary
of State Condoleezza Rice, jointly with her Canadian and Mexican
counterparts, will ensure that the two components are integrated
and that the SPP advances our strong relations with Mexico and
Canada.

This explanation of how the "working groups" were to be organized
and managed proved to be more detailed even than the explanation
given on SPP.gov, the website Secretary Gutierrez created within
the Department of Commerce to manage this new "tri-lateral
initiative."

Nowhere in the letter does Secretary Gutierrez make any reference
to the U.S. Congress. Instead, he invites inquiries to Geri Word
who works within the International Trade Administration (ITA)
office of the Department of Commerce, giving out her phone number
as 202-482-1545 and her email as geri_word@ita.doc.gov.

A new "Myths vs. Facts" addendum has been added to the SPP.gov
website, representing an attempt to deflect criticism. Here the
Department of Commerce attempts to discredit the "myth" that "The
SPP was an agreement signed by Presidents Bush and his Mexican and
Canadian counterparts in Waco, TX, on March 23, 2005." In the
"Fact" response, SPP.gov openly admits that the SPP declared in
Waco on that date was little more than a press release:

    The SPP is a dialogue to increase security and enhance
prosperity among the three countries. The SPP is not an agreement
nor is it a treaty. In fact, no agreement was ever signed.

The goal of the "Myth vs. Facts" seems to be to reposition the
entire SPP process as a mere "dialogue." If the Department of
Commerce were to openly admit that SPP.gov is rewriting U.S.
administrative law, Secretary Gutierrez would need some the
Constitutional justification to underpin his enthusiasm for
combining with Mexico and Canada. Are we to seriously believe that
pure dialogue, an exchange of intellectually challenging tri-
lateral ideas is the reason Secretary Gutierrez has boasted that
advancing SPP is one of the most important objectives of his
office?

Working groups rewriting U.S. administrative laws in areas ranging
from e-commerce, to steel policy, to energy policy, to aviation
control, to border crossing policy, to environment (to mention just
a few) are arguably creating the legal infrastructure for a
regional government to emerge by administrative fiat.

Yet, there is no provision in the U.S. Constitution that justifies
the executive branch to rewrite U.S. administrative law without
formulating a treaty that must be submitted to the Senate for
ratification by a two-thirds vote. These are the cold realities
Secretary Gutierrez and SPP.gov seek to side-step with their
reassuring "security" and "prosperity" platitudes.

Robert Pastor, the American University professor who is the leading
contender for the title "Father of the North American Union" has
provided much of the intellectual arguments for the logic
underlying SPP. Pastor has argued for an incremental process of
creating a North American Union, beginning with a "dialogue" that
sounds uncomfortably like the politically correct definition of its
mission as presented by SPP.gov itself.

Pastor in an article entitled "NAFTA is Not Enough," argued for an
incremental process that could head toward the creation of the NAU,
all the while providing cover for participating politicians and
governments to deny that creating the NAU was their goal. In this
essay, Pastor wrote:

    Europe has struggled with these questions for nearly fifty
years, and its members still have not clearly decided on their
destination. NAFTA is only eight years old, and its project from
the beginning was much more modest than the EU's. While the three
governments of North America are unlikely to step into the debate
on long-term goals at the current time, nongovernmental
organizations, research institutes, and universities should fill
the void with new ideas and old-fashioned cross-border dialogue.

Pastor begins the next paragraph by advising "the likely path the
three governments are to take is the status quo with modest
adjustments." He concludes the paragraph by commenting: "All three
governments could surprise themselves by taking a great leap
forward, but this seems possible only if there is a dramatic crisis
of some kind."

Dr. Pastor seems to prescribe that a fear formula is all that is
needed for the American people need to begin begging SPP to produce
the NAU right now. Pastor openly writes as if the next 9/11
terrorist attack or a future outbreak of some health epidemic such
as the avian flu could be just what the NAU doctor ordered as the
prescription for the American people to abandon sovereignty in
favor of super-regional government control, all in the interest of
"security" leading to "prosperity." Or, is it "prosperity" which
necessitates more "security" via surrender to Big Brother
government?

Disinformation and deniability are the two key concepts of the SPP
modus operandi. We have to look no further than the "Myth vs.
Facts" debunking document recently posted on the SPP.gov website
to see the anticipated denial:

    The SPP in no way, shape or form considers the creation of a
European Union-like structure or a common currency. The SPP does
not attempt to modify our sovereignty or currency or change the
American system of government designed by our Founding Fathers.

If SPP.gov is not aimed at a massive re-write of U.S.
administrative law in a tri-lateral "harmonized" and "integrated"
format, than why not just shut SPP.gov down? As Robert Pastor
pointed out, "dialogue" can occur within universities. Reading the
SPP.gov attempt at denial, we are reminded of Réné Magritte's
famous painting entitled "Ceci n'est pas un pipe."  

When the "dialogue" begins to take place in Cabinet-level tri-
lateral executive branch committees, patriots are well advised to
be concerned that an executive branch coup d'etat may be underway,
all in the name of a North American tri-lateral "partnership"
devoted to nothing more than "security" and "prosperity." Or, as
Aldous Huxley might ask, would someone please pass the soma? 



**************************************************************************

http://www.conspiracyarchive.com/NWO/North_American_Forum.htm


**************************************************************************
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
 * Origin: Try Our Web Based QWK: DOCSPLACE.ORG (1:123/140)